The One Stop Shop for Your Lazarus Scandal Needs!

[Kylia Quilor]

Independent Region does things for its own reasons and interests! Defenders Defend! The Black Hawks Raid! News of the obvious at 11!

Balder is independent, despite having intense imperialist ties and never defending.

TSP is defender, despite having diverse allies and an army that raids and defends.

Glad to see imperialists are still maintaining that time honored tradition of consistency.

I wasn't talking about TSP at all, Glen. I was pointing out that Roavin's comment of "the stated reason for Balder's support of your government is not out of the goodness of their hearts for Lazarus" was a statement of the obvious - of course an Independent region won't be doing things out of the goodness of their heart, and then said two more things that are also obvious. Roavin is always going on about how unless said otherwise the posts he make aren't official statements on behalf of TSP (its in his signature) so I can talk to him in a thread that isn't about TSP... without talking to him about TSP.

Nice work, Glen. Even Roavin got what I was talking about when I drew his attention to it in the Server.

[Onderkelkia]

Questions, not demands. I'm not in a position to make demands here, that's the CU's job. Anyway, I'll just explain my intent. Does it not concern you that the stated reason for Balder's support of your government is not out of the goodness of their hearts for Lazarus, but rather because (as Balder's Staatsminister stated quite clearly) an ideological cleansing?

Let's look at what Onder said.

Balder's statement is clear on the need to reverse the long-term consequences of the September 2013 coup. [...] In order to reverse the defender alignment and firmly end the pattern of defender subversion, those interests - foreign and domestic - would have to be confronted as adversaries and defeated.

Firstly, you are significantly misrepresenting my previous comments. Nowhere did I call for "ideological cleansing" - the removal of anyone with defender beliefs from Lazarus. Rather, in line with Balder's official statement, I indicated that the previous governments of Lazarus were illegitimate as they failed to reverse the September 2013 coup. That means ending the defender alignment and pattern of defender subversion that resulted from that coup.

Secondly, unless you are seriously arguing that sustaining the effects of the September 2013 is beneficial for Lazarus, there is no contradiction whatsoever between the objective of removing defender subversion and the good of Lazarus. Far from being mutually exclusive, those aims are complementary.

Recall that the September 2013 situation in Lazarus was that Feux used a loophole in the mandate to allow himself to purge 4 people. 3 of those were temporary, the other one was purged permanently for well-documented transgressions. Call it a coup if you want, I'm not even going to argue that (even though it technically wasn't).

The claim that it was "technically" legal is wrong. Mandate 7 required a 3/4 majority of the Emerald Council to remove its members. That was not attained. There were no "well-documented transgressions" warranting the removal of North East Somerset, let alone the other three members illegally removed.

The continued failure of the defender political establishment to recognise and treat the events of September 2013 as a coup not only deprives them of any moral high ground. It establishes their continued support and sympathy for the Defender dictatorship that was erected as a result. You think that a defender Lazarus was a good thing and, if a coup was necessary to achieve it, then that is a price worth paying. Hence why you are now attempting another coup.

It is in the interests of Lazarus and Balder alike to prevent you from succeeding in that effort.

Balder then supports you (suspiciously immediately after SovAcc was changed in a very particular way),

This is nothing more than conspiracy theory.

As is specified the text of the announcement, the amendment to the GCR Sovereignty Accords was agreed (unanimously) on 9th August. Balder intervened in Lazarus on 4th September. The GCRSA amendment was made in light of a military engagement in a user-created region and had nothing to do with Lazarus.

Just look at how freely he paints TSP as some defender outpost, a claim that is provably false.

In my post which you are so keen to link but have not rebutted, I outlined clear reasons for regarding the foreign policy of The South Pacific to have been subordinated to defender interests since 2014. The reasons being that that Glen-Rhodes admitted participation in a project to influence TSP (and Lazarus) to promote the defender political cause. The foreign policy of TSP today depends on the foundations that Glen-Rhodes and Unibot built in that era.

Balder is independent, despite having intense imperialist ties and never defending.

Balder is not an Imperialist region, but even if we were, the Independent Manifesto affirms that Imperialist regions are Independent:

III. An Imperialist region is functionally also an Independent region in terms of possessing the characteristics outlined in this statement. However, Imperialist regions have additional characteristics that do not apply to all Independent regions, and Independent and Imperialist regions have had at periods separate historical traditions, despite sharing common origins.

There is no contradiction between being Imperialist and being Independent.

Similarly, Independent regions do not perform any category of military operations for its own sake. Balder performs defensive operations when they serve our interests. We do not perform defensive operations for the sake of it and that would be the opposite of Independence. Again, the Manifesto explains this:

VIII. An Independent military does not a priori and universally take a position against any type of military operations for external moralistic reasons, nor does it commit to conducting a single type of military operations for its own sake. Furthermore, an Independent military is not under any burden to try to balance the amount of operations of different kinds. Rather, decisions and guidelines on the types of military operations an Independent military may execute are adopted on the basis of regional interests and can be reevaluated on a case-specific basis.

You are working off an understanding of Independence that is opposite to what the term has always meant.

[Solorni]

On some level I have to respect Roavin trying to fight from a fundamentally indefensible position. All alone and abandoned even by his Sancho Panza as he tilts at windmill after windmill.

[Canton Empire]

On some level I have to respect Roavin trying to fight from a fundamentally indefensible position. All alone and abandoned even by his Sancho Panza as he tilts at windmill after windmill.

Even though you're wrong, nice reference.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Balder is independent, despite having intense imperialist ties and never defending.

TSP is defender, despite having diverse allies and an army that raids and defends.

Glad to see imperialists are still maintaining that time honored tradition of consistency.

I wasn't talking about TSP at all, Glen.

That post clearly went over your head.

[Solorni]

On some level I have to respect Roavin trying to fight from a fundamentally indefensible position. All alone and abandoned even by his Sancho Panza as he tilts at windmill after windmill.

Even though you're wrong, nice reference.

My one English course at uni is paying off

[Queen of Ravens]

I wasn't talking about TSP at all, Glen.

That post clearly went over your head.

As far as I can recall, I've never actually called TSP a defender region. I've said its defender aligned, and has a lot of defender moralism, both of which are true. So if you were trying to make some grand point, quoting my post - which wasn't about TSP, is an accurate statement about Balder and was in response to Roavin and was built around a joke I've used more than once here (News of the obvious at 11) in GP - was not the way to do it.

The post didn't go over my head. It was just stupid and nonsequiterial.

[Glen-Rhodes]

That post clearly went over your head.

As far as I can recall, I've never actually called TSP a defender region.

Yes you have.

viewtopic.php?p=32283086#p32283086

To explain the post you still obviously don't understand: You will never call out Balder for being "imperialist-aligned" and say it underwent "imperial-ization" and that it's filled with TNI/LKE-ers. Nah, it's still an "independent" region.

But TSP is defender, defender-aligned, defender-ized, or whatever euphemism you feel like using, because TGW-TSP military cooperation is good and Roavin is our Prime Minister.

It's always been this way with imperialists. A region never defends, only raids (if it even has an army lol), and has an alliance network with mostly imperialists and other pro-raider "independent" regions? That's an upstanding independent region, acting according to its interests. A region defends and raids, and chooses its alliances based on who it trusts and the activity that cooperation will bring? Well, it's not independent. It's defender. Because there are defenders who are allowed to hold power.

[Miguel de Cervantes]

On some level I have to respect Roavin trying to fight from a fundamentally indefensible position. All alone and abandoned even by his Sancho Panza as he tilts at windmill after windmill.

Stop making a mockery out of a very serious problem. The windmill giants-in-disguise are an imminent threat to our well-being.

[Onderkelkia]

But TSP is defender, defender-aligned, defender-ized, or whatever euphemism you feel like using, because TGW-TSP military cooperation is good and Roavin is our Prime Minister.

The South Pacific's increased cooperation with the Grey Wardens in the last year is a symptom rather than a cause of its defenderisation.

The South Pacific is defender-aligned because its foreign policy underwent a major transformation in the course of 2014. It ceased to be the same Independent region that signed treaties with Europeia, Balder, TNI and Kantrias. Instead, its government deliberately undermined its relations with its Imperialist partners and attacked the notion of Independence. They did so in service of the global defender political cause. The foreign policy of TSP rests entirely on the transformation that occurred in 2014-15. Without that shift, TSP would not be the same region that it is today and you understand that.

Apart from what was transparent at the time, we know about the defender conspiracy to subvert TSP and other GCRs because you have told us about it:

The reality is that the defender world, lead mostly by Unibot, became more and more obsessed about the political rise of imperialism and particularly the UIAF in 2013-14. Defenders utilized their influence in some GCRs to lean them towards defending, or to promote anti-imperialist sentiment in neutral or Independent regions. In 2014-15, Unibot and myself made a concerted push for the argument that Independence was within the imperialist sphere and merely a more palatable cover for imperialist gameplay in neutral regions. That culminated in the dissolution of the TSP-TNI alliance, which was a significant event in the "Cold War."

In Lazarus, several members were ousted that had strong ties with Balder and imperialists. Thus was born the PRL. The growing defender/anti-imperialist bloc supported the PRL exactly because anti-imperialism was one of its tenants. TSP allied with the PRL and with The Rejected Realms because of defender and anti-imperialist politics. The TSP-Euro crisis was all about Independent-imperialists wanting to pick a fight with me, because I pretty much led the charge in removing their influence from TSP.

It's always been this way with imperialists.

Solorni is not an Imperialist. Her principal affiliations are Europeia and Balder. She does not even hold citizenship in the LKE.

A region never defends, only raids (if it even has an army lol),

On the contrary, Balder is engaged in a major defensive operation as we speak, namely defending Lazarus against an attempted Defender invasion. That is a defensive operation that upholds the interests of Balder, as opposed to defending random regions that we have no ties with against the allies of our region.

I suggest you go and ask your friends in the Revolt whether Balder has an army. They will enlighten you I am sure.

and has an alliance network with mostly imperialists and other pro-raider "independent" regions? That's an upstanding independent region, acting according to its interests.

Balder's allies are Osiris, The West Pacific, The North Pacific, The Pacific, Europeia, The Land of Kings and Emperors, United Kingdom and The Communist Bloc. We are also part of WALL (with TNP and Europeia) alongside the International Democratic Union. Among our allies, our sister sinker Osiris is the only raider region and the only Imperialist region is the LKE (which as an Imperialist region is also an Independent region; indeed Independence and Imperialism enjoy common origins in Great Britain and Ireland). These regions occasionally work with raiders, but it is frankly an absurd misrepresentation to suggest that serving the interests of raiders as a group is a key concern for any single one of Balder's allies (with the exception of Osiris, as a raider region itself). Balder is very much against the defender political project promoted by you and Unibot, but that should not be confused with being pro-raider.

[Roavin]

Firstly, you are significantly misrepresenting my previous comments. Nowhere did I call for "ideological cleansing" - the removal of anyone with defender beliefs from Lazarus. Rather, in line with Balder's official statement, I indicated that the previous governments of Lazarus were illegitimate as they failed to reverse the September 2013 coup. That means ending the defender alignment and pattern of defender subversion that resulted from that coup.

Secondly, unless you are seriously arguing that sustaining the effects of the September 2013 is beneficial for Lazarus, there is no contradiction whatsoever between the objective of removing defender subversion and the good of Lazarus. Far from being mutually exclusive, those aims are complementary.

Ending the defender alignment was being done beforehand as well, supported by the very people that Funkadelia and crew had purged. The only thing that was somewhat in the way was the XYZ Treaty, and I know that Funkadelia himself had been in talks regarding that (to see if it can be changed, or if Lazarus should leave it). Furthermore, the Triumvirate itself doesn't want this to be about ideological issues (or so they say). Regarding ending the pattern of defender subversion — FRA is dead. Funkadelia was elected by the very people he purged as an open raider. What kind of subversion was there supposedly?

Furthermore, you specifically indicated that domestic threats must be removed. That means, natives. Natives that hold defender beliefs will, logically, tend to be supportive of more defender-like policies. Are you honestly going to say that you can distinguish between "domestic defender subversives" and "domestic defenders"? In fact, is there ANY even remotely defender-leaning person you do not consider subversive by default?

You don't have to answer - we know the answer already. You have told us many times that in your view, a defender "prioritises the defence of regions from invasion over an individual region's material self-interest" (a false assumption), making them subversive by default. This is your argument. That you don't support removing anyone with defender beliefs is an empty statement, because by your own logic, no individual with defender beliefs that is not also a subversive, therefore anybody with defender beliefs is ripe for the purge.

The continued failure of the defender political establishment to recognise and treat the events of September 2013 as a coup not only deprives them of any moral high ground. It establishes their continued support and sympathy for the Defender dictatorship that was erected as a result. You think that a defender Lazarus was a good thing and, if a coup was necessary to achieve it, then that is a price worth paying. Hence why you are now attempting another coup.

It is in the interests of Lazarus and Balder alike to prevent you from succeeding in that effort.

Note how I said "Call it a coup if you want, I'm not even going to argue that". I'm also generally not a fan of coups. What I find fascinating is that you don't consider Funkadelia to have committed a coup, but you see the September 2013 events as a coup.

2013: Feux uses a legal loop-hole on very shaky legal grounds to summarily dismiss 4 people.
2017: Funkadelia uses a legal loop-hole on very shaky legal grounds to summarily purge roughly 25 people.

2013 was a coup, but 2017 wasn't? You are being selective. You consider 2013 a purge because Imperialists were affected. You don't consider 2017 a coup because now defenders are being affected.

Just look at how freely he paints TSP as some defender outpost, a claim that is provably false.

In my post which you are so keen to link but have not rebutted, I outlined clear reasons for regarding the foreign policy of The South Pacific to have been subordinated to defender interests since 2014. The reasons being that that Glen-Rhodes admitted participation in a project to influence TSP (and Lazarus) to promote the defender political cause. The foreign policy of TSP today depends on the foundations that Glen-Rhodes and Unibot built in that era.

I haven't rebutted that yet, true. I may yet. But even if you consider TSP's FA to be completely defender-oriented since 2014 (which, while I'll grant you a slant, is also demonstrably untrue), that still doesn't make TSP proper a defender region. Again, I point to TSP's military. Or wait a bit when we announce two new allies, one of which certainly can't be considered defenders in any way.

On some level I have to respect Roavin trying to fight from a fundamentally indefensible position. All alone and abandoned even by his Sancho Panza as he tilts at windmill after windmill.

Not true but nice reference at least

---

Anyway, the Triumvirate has been oddly silent here. Let's hear it. Are you okay with Balder supporting you for the purpose of purging defenders, or not?

[Killer Kitty]

Anyway, the Triumvirate has been oddly silent here.?

...The What?

[Onderkelkia]

Ending the defender alignment was being done beforehand as well, supported by the very people that Funkadelia and crew had purged. The only thing that was somewhat in the way was the XYZ Treaty, and I know that Funkadelia himself had been in talks regarding that (to see if it can be changed, or if Lazarus should leave it). Furthermore, the Triumvirate itself doesn't want this to be about ideological issues (or so they say). Regarding ending the pattern of defender subversion — FRA is dead. Funkadelia was elected by the very people he purged as an open raider. What kind of subversion was there supposedly?

In my previous remarks, I specifically addressed why repealing the defence-only portion of the Mandate hardly indicated that the consequences of the September 2013 coup had been fully reversed. For someone citing my previous post, it is strange that you have not read it. Here is the key paragraph again:

Balder's statement is clear on the need to reverse the long-term consequences of the September 2013 coup. That coup transformed Lazarus as a society and reversing its effects would take something equally radical. Far too much is being made of the decision to remove the defence-only portion from the Mandate following the FRA's demise - a decision that could be entirely consistent with continuing to use Lazarus as an instrument of Defenderism akin to The South Pacific. You acknowledge that Lazarus remained culturally defender. Lazarus retained Harmoneia - the architect of the September 2013 coup - as a Guardian and forum administrator, and she was even Sovereign previously. Lazarus kept its alliances with regions which either formed or retained alliances with Lazarus during the period of the PRL - in particular, The Rejected Times and The South Pacific. By aligning themselves with PRL Lazarus, those regions actively participated in its subjugation. Lazarus became defender because defender interests subverted it. In order to reverse the defender alignment and firmly end the pattern of defender subversion, those interests - foreign and domestic - would have to be confronted as adversaries and defeated.

The core issue is wholesale reversal of the consequences of the September 2013 coup. That event altered the community of Lazarus in ways more profound than simply adding a line to the Mandate. Without that coup, Lazarus in July 2017 would have had a different set of members, allies and preferences.

Furthermore, you specifically indicated that domestic threats must be removed. That means, natives. Natives that hold defender beliefs will, logically, tend to be supportive of more defender-like policies. Are you honestly going to say that you can distinguish between "domestic defender subversives" and "domestic defenders"? In fact, is there ANY even remotely defender-leaning person you do not consider subversive by default?

The specific argument I made was that "Lazarus became defender because defender interests subverted it" and that "those interests - foreign and domestic - would have to be confronted as adversaries and defeated." I did not say that all defenders in Lazarus had to be removed. I merely stated that the forces of defender subversion had to be defeated. If you accept the premise that defender interests have subverted Lazarus, then how can you be opposed to defeating the forces that have sought to subvert Lazarus? Unless of course you think that defender interests should be permitted to subvert Lazarus.

That naturally includes the individuals responsible for defender subversion within Lazarus as well as those outside it (the regimes that supported the PRL when it was a full-blown defender dictatorship, namely The Rejected Realms and The South Pacific). In this case, however, all the actors located inside and outside of Lazarus who supported defender interests have helpfully made themselves easy to identify by throwing their lot in with the Revolt.

You don't have to answer - we know the answer already. You have told us many times that in your view, a defender "prioritises the defence of regions from invasion over an individual region's material self-interest" (a false assumption), making them subversive by default. This is your argument. That you don't support removing anyone with defender beliefs is an empty statement, because by your own logic, no individual with defender beliefs that is not also a subversive, therefore anybody with defender beliefs is ripe for the purge.

The full quote is:

As Defenderism prioritises the defence of regions from invasion over an individual region's material self-interest, is inherently incompatible with following a region's self-interest.

As you can see, I did not say defenders; I said 'Defenderism' - i.e. the idealistic defender ideology espoused by Unibot, to whom I was replying in that discussion. If a region binds itself to any kind of moralistic creed, then it will inevitably compromise its material self-interest. There is nothing self-interested about randomly defending regions you have no connections with and needlessly creating hostilities with actual gameplay powers as a result.

Some individuals with defender beliefs may be able to restrain themselves from promoting the defender cause over their region's self-interest. If your argument is that they are unable to do so and that every defender puts Defenderism ahead of the region that they are in, then they are indeed committing subversion. However, the association of all individual defenders with that position is not an assumption made in that argument; it is your assumption.

Note how I said "Call it a coup if you want, I'm not even going to argue that".

Yet you do argue it, by continuing to claim it is justifiable, by unsupported reference to either technicalities or alleged misdeeds by North East Somerset.

I'm also generally not a fan of coups.

With the exception of Feux and Harmoneia's September 2013 coup, apparently.

What I find fascinating is that you don't consider Funkadelia to have committed a coup, but you see the September 2013 events as a coup.

2013: Feux uses a legal loop-hole on very shaky legal grounds to summarily dismiss 4 people.
2017: Funkadelia uses a legal loop-hole on very shaky legal grounds to summarily purge roughly 25 people.

2013 was a coup, but 2017 wasn't? You are being selective. You consider 2013 a purge because Imperialists were affected. You don't consider 2017 a coup because now defenders are being affected.

As regards the September 2013 coup, there was no legal loophole permitting Feux and Harmoneia to proceed as they did.

Insofar as the present situation is concerned, as far as I can see, it was the Revolt who plotted a coup against the lawful Delegate, before being exposed and starting open rebellion in concert with foreign powers who have sought to subvert Lazarus in the interests of the defender sphere since the PRL.

In any case, the continuity in the legal succession of Lazarus's governments was broken in 2013.

I haven't rebutted that yet, true. I may yet. But even if you consider TSP's FA to be completely defender-oriented since 2014 (which, while I'll grant you a slant, is also demonstrably untrue), that still doesn't make TSP proper a defender region. Again, I point to TSP's military. Or wait a bit when we announce two new allies, one of which certainly can't be considered defenders in any way.

Nowhere has it been argued that The South Pacific has had foreign relations exclusively with Defender regions since 2013. That is a straw man. It is entirely possible to have a foreign policy which is essentially subordinated to defender interests while continuing to maintain contact with non-defender regions.

Rather, the point is that The South Pacific ceased to be the same Independent region that signed treaties with Europeia, Balder, The New Inquisition and Kantrias. Instead, it has pursued a foreign policy designed to create conflict with Imperialist regions and challenge the notion of Independence.

We now this because Glen-Rhodes has told us what he and Unibot set out to achieve:

The reality is that the defender world, lead mostly by Unibot, became more and more obsessed about the political rise of imperialism and particularly the UIAF in 2013-14. Defenders utilized their influence in some GCRs to lean them towards defending, or to promote anti-imperialist sentiment in neutral or Independent regions. In 2014-15, Unibot and myself made a concerted push for the argument that Independence was within the imperialist sphere and merely a more palatable cover for imperialist gameplay in neutral regions. That culminated in the dissolution of the TSP-TNI alliance, which was a significant event in the "Cold War."

In Lazarus, several members were ousted that had strong ties with Balder and imperialists. Thus was born the PRL. The growing defender/anti-imperialist bloc supported the PRL exactly because anti-imperialism was one of its tenants. TSP allied with the PRL and with The Rejected Realms because of defender and anti-imperialist politics. The TSP-Euro crisis was all about Independent-imperialists wanting to pick a fight with me, because I pretty much led the charge in removing their influence from TSP.

Unibot and Glen-Rhodes succeeded in this plot to promote the Defender cause in TSP (and in Lazarus). The foreign policy choices of TSP since then have necessarily been completely different from those that preceded the end of ties with TNI and the alliances with The Rejected Realms and Lazarus.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Actually, Unibot didn't. He got banned. All I did was pass treaties with Lazarus and TRR. I didn't run the military, nor did I ever recruit anybody for it or TSP at large. TSP aligned itself with defenders because of your own behavior (you were particularly endearing to Geomania), and the sour taste left in many TSPer's mouth in how the Independent-imperialist bloc saw TSP and treated it.

We've had more raider-leaning SPSF leaders in that time period than defenders. You can hardly accuse Imki or Vietnam or Resentine of kowtowing to me as MoFA. And Hileville, Sopo, Raven, and Sam were MoFAs after me.

Nope, the people who made TSP go towards defending were you and yours. Europeia and TNI's hamfisted strategic blunders, and Balder's no doubt, did way more for the "defenderization" of TSP than the two treaties I passed.

[Kylia Quilor]

As far as I can recall, I've never actually called TSP a defender region.

Yes you have.

viewtopic.php?p=32283086#p32283086

I stand corrected. Mea culpa.

But as has been pointed out repeatedly, Imperialism is a form of Independence.

[Onderkelkia]

Don't be so modest about your own role, Glen-Rhodes. You were perfectly open about your own role and that of Unibot in January 2016:

The reality is that the defender world, lead mostly by Unibot, became more and more obsessed about the political rise of imperialism and particularly the UIAF in 2013-14. Defenders utilized their influence in some GCRs to lean them towards defending, or to promote anti-imperialist sentiment in neutral or Independent regions. In 2014-15, Unibot and myself made a concerted push for the argument that Independence was within the imperialist sphere and merely a more palatable cover for imperialist gameplay in neutral regions. That culminated in the dissolution of the TSP-TNI alliance, which was a significant event in the "Cold War."

In Lazarus, several members were ousted that had strong ties with Balder and imperialists. Thus was born the PRL. The growing defender/anti-imperialist bloc supported the PRL exactly because anti-imperialism was one of its tenants. TSP allied with the PRL and with The Rejected Realms because of defender and anti-imperialist politics. The TSP-Euro crisis was all about Independent-imperialists wanting to pick a fight with me, because I pretty much led the charge in removing their influence from TSP.

All that was said in January 2016, well after the events concerned. You admitted that "Defenders utilized their influence in some GCRs to lean them towards defending, or to promote anti-imperialist sentiment in neutral or Independent regions." You specifically noted that you made "a concerted push for the argument that Independence was within the imperialist sphere", which you then stated "culminated in the dissolution of the TSP-TNI alliance".

What has changed now? Why are you now so shy about your actions? Cease with this false modesty.

TSP aligned itself with defenders because of your own behavior (you were particularly endearing to Geomania)

TNI raised a complaint with Geomania over his inappropriate conduct in releasing information provided to him by TNI officials to The Rejected Realms, a publication run by a region with which TNI was at war and an outlet which would subsequently be banned in regions such as The North Pacific and Europeia.

We were entirely right to raise concerns. It was the portrayal of our concerns within TSP that was problematic - and the sign of its self-delusion.

Nope, the people who made TSP go towards defending were you and yours. Europeia and TNI's hamfisted strategic blunders, and Balder's no doubt, did way more for the "defenderization" of TSP than the two treaties I passed.

As Foreign Minister of TSP, you actively sabotaged relations with TNI and the Imperialist sphere. You have admitted as much.

Why would TNI retain a treaty with such a region?

TNI merely saw TSP for what it was: a lost cause under your influence. If Europeia and Balder made a mistake, it was not seeing that earlier.

[Pencil Sharpeners 2]

---

Pencil Sharpeners Puppet Storage, regarded as one of the most influential stationary-based puppet storage regions in NationStates, has finally broken its silence over the Lazarus kerfuffle, coming out in support of the Celestial Union, the government currently exiled from Lazarus.

I (PS2) am here interviewing the founder of Pencil Sharpeners Puppet Storage, Sensible Government Type (SGT).

PS2: So, you’ve decided to support the Celestial Union?

SGT: Yes. You literally said that in the first paragraph. Please don’t ask me questions you already know the answer to.

PS2: OK.. so what made you want to join the debate?

SGT: I regularly read the threads here and was astounded by the displays of logical reasoning, maturity, and general respect both sides have for each other. I knew that this would be the perfect calm, low-intensity debate for me to begin my GP involvement with.

PS2: And what are your reasons for supporting the Celestial Union?

SGT: I just oppose the Undead whatever-the-rest-of-the-name-is because I think zombies are really overused nowadays. The Celestial Union’s theme is atrocious, but at least it’s not zombies.

PS2: As a vibrant and powerful region, what do you think Pencil Sharpeners Puppet Storage can offer to help the Celestial Union?

SGT: Well, we don’t actually have any WA members. I have a secret WA puppet in another region, but I don’t really want to use it for this. I guess we can offer them some vague and unenthusiastic moral support.

PS2: Do you think the way you govern your region reflects the governing style of the Celestial Union?

SGT: Well, so far my region is absolutely bereft of any form of activity, and I’m not doing anything to change that, so I guess I have successfully emulated what the Celestial Union did during their time governing Lazarus.

PS2: There have been some differing views on what caused Funkadelia to coup, what do you think are his reasons for doing this?

SGT: Well I, along with literally everyone else in NS, had absolutely no idea who Funk was until this coup. I suspect his main reason for doing this was to gain attention, to quell the ever-intensifying voices in his head reminding him of his failure to gain GP recognition. “You’ll never be as infamous as Cormac,” they said, “You’ll never be a wordsmith like Onder, or a gif-master like Escade.” These voices nagged at him constantly, until one day, he snapped.

PS2: Do you have anything to say to Funk and his supporters?

SGT: Yes. You may be in power for the moment… and possibly for the next few years too, but eventually justice shall reign, and the Celestial Union will make Lazarus defen- uh… I mean Strong and Stable again!

PS2: A clear message. The Undead Dominion of Lazarus has gained some powerful enemies today; we await to see what effect this much-anticipated announcement will have on the Lazarus debate.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Yes, Onder, I'm right when I say that Unibot and I made arguments against Independence. We didn't force you berate Geomania and sour SPSF-TNI cooperation. We didn't force Europeia, Balder, and TNI to scheme in secret to force an ultimatum in TSP of choosing between them and Lazarus. We didn't force Osiris to become the main raider poster child, and Cormac to blunder his way through torching bridges with half of Gameplay. And we didn't force any outsiders to try to stack our MoFA elections.

All we did was argue that Independence was raider by default and that imperialist regions (centered around you and NES) were unpleasant allies. It was y'alls behavior that made our arguments convincing. If TNI, Euro, and Balder had been good allies, I would've been the crazy guy on the street shouting nonsense. It just never occurred to any of you to actually treat TSP as a co-equal. There were, after all, a string of Independent-minded MoFAs and Cabinets after me. I was only MoFA for a year. Y'all could've easily salvaged things, particularly Euro and Balder, if you were good allies.

[Onderkelkia]

Yes, Onder, I'm right when I say that Unibot and I made arguments against Independence.

Given that TSP's Foreign Minister was attacking Independence and Independent regions, why would Independent regions want relations with TSP?

Not only that, but you indicated that you did this as part of a global defender conspiracy to move GCRs and Independent regions towards Defenderism and away from the Imperialist sphere. In other words, you were promoting the Defender political cause to harm the Independent and Imperialist spheres.

As you said, "Defenders utilized their influence in some GCRs to lean them towards defending, or to promote anti-imperialist sentiment in neutral or Independent regions." TSP moved in a pro-defender direction as a function of this effort and the course of its foreign policy was altered accordingly.

We didn't force you berate Geomania and sour SPSF-TNI cooperation.

SPSF-TNIAF cooperation was soured by Geomania sharing details of his conversations with TNI officials to a publication run by a region with which TNI was at war (and a publication which subsequently was banned in several regions, including The North Pacific and Europeia). TNI was correct to raise a concern. TSP's failure to appreciate that only illustrates that TSP under your tenure as Foreign Minister had zero respect for TNI's policy towards TRR as an FRA region.

We didn't force Europeia, Balder, and TNI to scheme in secret to force an ultimatum in TSP of choosing between them and Lazarus.

This is fiction. TNI and Balder had no part in discussions within Europeia over the hosting arrangements for the Independence Convention.

Europeia chose The South Pacific, rather than TNI or Balder, as a potential co-host. TSP threw that back in Europeia's face by co-hosting a rival conference.

We didn't force Osiris to become the main raider poster child, and Cormac to blunder his way through torching bridges with half of Gameplay. And we didn't force any outsiders to try to stack our MoFA elections.

TNI, Balder and Europeia are Independent regions, so it can hardly be argued that they influenced Osiris to become a raider region.

Putting aside whether your characterisations of Cormac's actions or TSP's MoFA elections are accurate, they had nothing to do with TNI or Balder.

I was only MoFA for a year. Y'all could've easily salvaged things, particularly Euro and Balder, if you were good allies.

If a week is a long time in real-life politics, a year is far longer in NS politics. Good allies are consistent in offering friendship and respect at all times.

It was not TNI, Balder or Europeia's job to hope that someone equally determined as you would achieve success in pursuing the exact opposite policies.

TSP is accountable for the actions of its government.

TNI was not interested in fighting guerrilla warfare to save TSP from you in the long term, if its people saw fit to elect someone trying destroy to TNI-TSP relations. TSP chose you as a representative, and you formed alliances with TRR and the defender dictatorship in Lazarus, which were intended to undermine TSP-TNI relations. That resulted in structural changes to The South Pacific's foreign affairs and changed the character of its political debates from 2012-13 when it was an Independent region. It was not TNI's job to save TSP from themselves after they repeatedly tolerated your actions against TNI.

[The NAtion OF Froggy]

I see blame shifting to one side... A sentence gets a paragraph of saying the buck stops over there.

I am not sure, if this game has destroyed rational thought or something else.


Also ps2. Well done. Brava

[Midnight Indo]

This whole Celestial Union-Funkadelia attrition war is getting quite boring now.

While the Celestial Union still has a sizeable amount of support, they should broker a deal with the de facto Lazarus Government or form a new region.

[The Noble Thatcherites]

This whole Celestial Union-Funkadelia attrition war is getting quite boring now.

While the Celestial Union still has a sizeable amount of support, they should broker a deal with the de facto Lazarus Government or form a new region.

Wat.... Do explain more.

[The North Polish Union]

I see blame shifting to one side... A sentence gets a paragraph of saying the buck stops over there.

I am not sure, if this game has destroyed rational thought or something else.


Also ps2. Well done. Brava

Of course the buck stops over there. If it stopped with G-R it would force him to take at least some responsibility for starting TSP down the path to the diplomatic quagmires its in now. And if it stopped with Onder it would force him to admit that his overbearing attitude is at least partly responsible for the decline of imperialism as a relevant ideology.

[The NAtion OF Froggy]

I see blame shifting to one side... A sentence gets a paragraph of saying the buck stops over there.

I am not sure, if this game has destroyed rational thought or something else.


Also ps2. Well done. Brava

Of course the buck stops over there. If it stopped with G-R it would force him to take at least some responsibility for starting TSP down the path to the diplomatic quagmires its in now. And if it stopped with Onder it would force him to admit that his overbearing attitude is at least partly responsible for the decline of imperialism as a relevant ideology.

Meh. To much of that on both sides is like that cartoon where they keep sending the guy to the other window the problem with that is all sides are why this happened not just one. Man up and work things out. Cant we all just get along. (if that goes over your head. Shame)

[Onderkelkia]

And if it stopped with Onder it would force him to admit that his overbearing attitude is at least partly responsible for the decline of imperialism as a relevant ideology.

That is a rather strange interpretation of this discussion. The decline of "imperialism" from its heights in 2012-15 had nothing to do with the mid-2014 dissolution of the TNI-TSP Treaty and everything to do with the end of the United Imperial Armed Forces and the structural decline of The New Inquisition. The dissolution of the TNI-TSP Treaty was the outcome that TSP's Foreign Minister contrived to obtain by forming an alliance with The Rejected Realms.

As an individual region, the LKE is as powerful and relevant now as it was when UIAF existed - if not more so.